Diane Abbott’s take on drownings in Med

Have I ever described or evaluated myself as a top notch lawyer Maizie? No. My partners in a big City firm presumably thought I was good enough for them though.

Have I ever said that my understanding of the law is that they should stay in the first safe country? No.

18Oreo

Whitewavemark2

Whitewavemark2

Iam64

Cloughdancet 👏👏👏👏

Seconded

Thirded😄😄

Haha cheating there whitewavemark2😄

Tbh I found choughdancer’s post verging on the ridiculous.
A naive emotional post at best.
As a British national and a taxpayer you are fully entitled to live here and have first dibs, the ‘oh go on, be kind, let them all in’ brigade don’t do us all any favours if they managed to get their way.

Seconded Oreo😊 I agree with every word of your post

MaizieD

Germanshepherdsmum

I have never said people should stay in the first safe country they reach. Kindly read my posts more carefully. Of course that would be totally unworkable. I have, however, repeatedly said that once they have reached a safe country they are no longer desperate and fleeing, adjectives so beloved of some posters.

I don't see what their state of mind once they reach a safe country has to do with the issue at all.

As a self evaluated top notch lawyer you should know that under international law they are under no obligation to stay in the first safe country they reach. The ones who reach the UK have their reasons, most of them perfectly valid, for wanting to come here. Your opinion on their 'feelings' is, thank God, irrelevant.

You’re right, they have no obligation to stay in a safe country and can push on to wherever they like.You also have no obligation to do that either, especially if it means chancing death on the ocean waves.Why would anyone do that.They have their reasons? Probably they think the UK is a softer touch or have heard it is.

13:15Casdon

Nicenanny3

I'm not wriggling out of anything I stand by what I said. If people wanted to stop the Criminal Smuggling Gangs they should support the Rwanda scheme and the Illegal Migration Bill.

People can see for themselves what you said. Whether people support the ‘solutions’ proposed by the government is down to their own moral compass. Mine is certainly very different to yours.

It's a free country and we still have free speech, I support Rwanda and The Illegal Migration Bill and you don't, GN is a public forum how boring if we all thought the same way

Whitewavemark2

Whitewavemark2

Iam64

Cloughdancet 👏👏👏👏

Seconded

Thirded😄😄

Haha cheating there whitewavemark2😄

Tbh I found choughdancer’s post verging on the ridiculous.
A naive emotional post at best.
As a British national and a taxpayer you are fully entitled to live here and have first dibs, the ‘oh go on, be kind, let them all in’ brigade don’t do us all any favours if they managed to get their way.

Nicenanny3

I'm not wriggling out of anything I stand by what I said. If people wanted to stop the Criminal Smuggling Gangs they should support the Rwanda scheme and the Illegal Migration Bill.

People can see for themselves what you said. Whether people support the ‘solutions’ proposed by the government is down to their own moral compass. Mine is certainly very different to yours.

have no idea what she said as I won't open a link to that vile newspaper.

Well said choughdancer. This is so true and in another life this could very well be us, and our family risking their lives in flimsy boats.

I'm not wriggling out of anything I stand by what I said. If people wanted to stop the Criminal Smuggling Gangs they should support the Rwanda scheme and the Illegal Migration Bill.

Nicenanny3

12:52Casdon

Nicenanny3

Well you will be happy today 100,000 arrived across the channel since 2018, 400 today. The criminal smuggling gangs are coining it in but seems many are happy about that.

What a weird comment. I don’t think anybody at all wants people to come in dangerous small boats across the channel. The compassionate among us do want to see a safe legal asylum system which prevents anybody needing to risk their lives.

*Even if there were safe legal asylum routes to the UK the ones who are economic migrants or have criminal records, not genuine with no Id's would still come via smuggling gangs, the dinghies wouldn't stop, naive to think otherwise in my opinion. We need a deterrent like Rwanda if they saw that if they arrived illegally by dinghy that they would be sent to Rwanda or some other country for processing they would soon think twice about handing over thousands of Euros to get here. But of course Labour voted against the Illegal Migration Bill so we know where they stand*

You can’t wriggle out of what you said by diverting to other points Nicenanny3. What you said was offensive and untrue.

12:52Casdon

Nicenanny3

Well you will be happy today 100,000 arrived across the channel since 2018, 400 today. The criminal smuggling gangs are coining it in but seems many are happy about that.

What a weird comment. I don’t think anybody at all wants people to come in dangerous small boats across the channel. The compassionate among us do want to see a safe legal asylum system which prevents anybody needing to risk their lives.

Even if there were safe legal asylum routes to the UK the ones who are economic migrants or have criminal records, not genuine with no Id's would still come via smuggling gangs, the dinghies wouldn't stop, naive to think otherwise in my opinion. We need a deterrent like Rwanda if they saw that if they arrived illegally by dinghy that they would be sent to Rwanda or some other country for processing they would soon think twice about handing over thousands of Euros to get here. But of course Labour voted against the Illegal Migration Bill so we know where they stand

sassysaysso

Can you explain your reasoning behind your ridiculous assertion that many are happy that criminals are exploiting human misery and desperation?

This was for Nicenanny3

Can you explain your reasoning behind your ridiculous assertion that many are happy that criminals are exploiting human misery and desperation?

Nicenanny3

Well you will be happy today 100,000 arrived across the channel since 2018, 400 today. The criminal smuggling gangs are coining it in but seems many are happy about that.

What a weird comment. I don’t think anybody at all wants people to come in dangerous small boats across the channel. The compassionate among us do want to see a safe legal asylum system which prevents anybody needing to risk their lives.

The hypocrisy of many on here is breathtaking, especially those who suggest that the boats should be turned around and sent back to France.

Well you will be happy today 100,000 arrived across the channel since 2018, 400 today. The criminal smuggling gangs are coining it in but seems many are happy about that.

Choughdancer ,brilliant post.

Germanshepherdsmum

I have never said people should stay in the first safe country they reach. Kindly read my posts more carefully. Of course that would be totally unworkable. I have, however, repeatedly said that once they have reached a safe country they are no longer desperate and fleeing, adjectives so beloved of some posters.

I don't see what their state of mind once they reach a safe country has to do with the issue at all.

As a self evaluated top notch lawyer you should know that under international law they are under no obligation to stay in the first safe country they reach. The ones who reach the UK have their reasons, most of them perfectly valid, for wanting to come here. Your opinion on their 'feelings' is, thank God, irrelevant.

Whitewavemark2

Iam64

Cloughdancet 👏👏👏👏

Seconded

Thirded😄😄

Iam64

Cloughdancet 👏👏👏👏

Seconded

I have never said people should stay in the first safe country they reach. Kindly read my posts more carefully. Of course that would be totally unworkable. I have, however, repeatedly said that once they have reached a safe country they are no longer desperate and fleeing, adjectives so beloved of some posters.

Iam64

Cloughdancet 👏👏👏👏

Seconded

Cloughdancet 👏👏👏👏

Lots of different people of all colours and creeds in the UK want to stop the boats. It's not about colour although the posters who call other posters racists keep mentioning colour especially white. I do not see colour when I see who is in the boats only their gender.

Glorianny

Germanshepherdsmum

They stopped fleeing when they reached the first safe country. Their choice to risk their lives crossing the channel.

As I said your comments reflect your views and your perception of people fleeing death and persecution. "Not our problem" is a frequent excuse.

I too feel that this much repeated 'first safe country' is an excuse to make it 'not our problem'. GSM you have made it clear that you think that anyone fleeing death, war, starvation etc. should stay in the first safe country they reach. Can you expand on how this would work?

Already, the countries nearest to conflict and other disasters are accommodating refugees in vast numbers (70% according to UNHCR data) and most of the refugees (76%, UNHCR data) are hosted in low- and middle-income countries.

This is a result of people stopping in the 'first safe country': huge numbers of refugees living in appalling conditions, with little hope of recovery or a future life; a huge burden on already poor and undeveloped countries who are already struggling.

So we, in our relatively rich country with all the benefits that living in the UK gives us such as free healthcare, education etc., hide behind our fortunate distance from the main areas of conflict and devastation, saying 'first safe country' over and over again. Sorry this is not acceptable. What we seem to be saying is that not one iota of our privilege should be sacrificed for the sake of reaching out to our fellow human beings in desperate need. Yet it is fine to inflict on them and their host countries the burdens of the refugee situation.

Can anyone please tell me why we are more entitled to happy, safe, privileged lives than others? I am not aware that I have done anything to deserve one. I was simply lucky enough to be born white, in a country that is rich and spacious and far from the areas in conflict or suffering severe effects of the climate crisis. I am far from rich by UK standards, but by world standards I am wealthy in all senses of the word.

Every time I think about this or read posts about it I get a picture of us all sitting on top of a huge ivory tower, with massive walls around us, no drawbridge, with our noses in the air and our eyes firmly shut. Beneath the walls are billions of desperate people reaching out for help, but all that comes to them is a mumbled echo of 'first safe country'.