Almost 1,000 migrants crossed the Channel yesterday.

(We are currently deporting people back to their country of origin, but it is with that countries permission). According to your logic, the French should be able to load people back up and say they have just left a safe country so we are returning them to you........

SGBoo

To those of you who think they had 14yrs to develop a plan, why didnt the tories have a plan? Rwanda was not a plan.

I think it's a fairly easy solution tbh

We rewrite immigration rules.

- Anyone coming over in a boat, without papers will be DNA tested and sent back to France who will be advised of tgeir ethnicity. Their faces will be included in facial recognition systems to match them if they try to reenter. They will have the of return cost on file and if they try to re-enter that debt becomes payable immediately which means they may be detained and put to work to pay the debt. They will them be returned to France.

Anyone entering not by boat with papers who claims assylum will be processed within a given time (I think 3 months is enough time) housed at an ex-military facility provided with basics ie food shelter, warm and where appropriate clothing but will not be given any money or other amenities. They left with no money and can therefore survive here with no money.
- Anyone found to have a criminal record will be deported. Faces included in facial recognition software so reentry that undetected is made difficult.
- Anyone found to carry disease that could be a burden on the nhs is to be disallowed entry (I couldn't go to Aussie because I'm diabetic)
- Once processed and assylum is approved, they remain but are required to regularly check in for a period of 7 years so that any matter that was not surfaced in the 3m processing can be found and dealt with eg new criminal charges.

- Anyone committing serious crimes in UK will be returned home with their faces in facial recognition and the debt for returning them home placed on their record. Any prison sentence to be served in their home country. The debt to be repaid immediately upon attempted reentry followed by immediate return and this cost added as a debt to their file.

Anyone else who wants to come here to work needs a sponsorship. We need immigrants to come and work here, but ffs we do not need trafficked people or those who think they will get an easy life here. They won't. We need to be more open to economic migration too, the current rules are a little excessive.

I'd love to hear others thoughts and solutions. I am the product of economic immigration btw, mixed race and proud of it. What I see is my country going down the pan because stupid people are coming over in droves, the French, who we are paying are doing naff all, but France is a safe country, so they can deal with the immigrants. Why should we?

I very sensible suggestion.

It’s a simple fact that the rules, formulated after WW2 in the wake of the Holocaust, are out of date and now unworkable. The rules need amending, but countries losing people to other countries (usually western countries) probably don’t particularly want their own people back and appear to be happy with the status quo.

A sensible suggestion but when did any government here do what’s sensible regarding illegal migration?

I cant think of any country giving up the right to protect their land and sea space against possible attack/invasion, any more now than post WW2, which is what is being suggested.

As I said above, under the proposals outlined, if France is expected to accept boat and plane invasion, so would we, and I can't see that happening.

@SGBoo, I agree, that what you are suggesting might well bring about a bit more clarity and progress in dealing with the situation, but I disagree with your comment that France is doing "naff all."
France might look as though it can't be bothered and wants to offload the problem onto us, but they are in a similar position and point the finger at the Italians. I've read in many a French newspaper that they consider the Italians incapable and inept at dealing with the migration problem. France's attitude is, why can't Italy deal with the immigrants, its a safe country too and probably more in need of workers. For example, schools in the South of France, especially around Marseille are struggling with the influx of refugees, so naturally tensions are high.
The problem is a hot potato being past from country to country.

Suggesting France should keep migrants is irrational, how do you think they get to France exactly? Perhaps we should just propose the Greek islands and Italy take them all, because that’s where they land in Europe? Come on people, be sensible, this is as much our problem as it is the rest of Europe’s.

Exactly, Casdon. And equally France has had to rescue boats carrying migrants where ministers in Rome have refused assistance. It needs joined up thinking.

You have to watch French TV and read French newspapers to see how much the French authorities are doing around Calais and Dunkirk. Otherwise you won't know, will you?
Ce n'est pas sorcier. 😂

the last three posts -thank you, they really introduce an important perspective.

mamie Agreed - I'm fed up with having to re post articles on just how much the French are doing, and the difficulties they face - Sky news is very good.

Top doctors have identified Britain’s immigration system as a “public mental health concern” that inflicts harm on asylum seekers, and risks “re-traumatising” those already affected by psychological distress.
The Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCP) has called on ministers to review immigration laws introduced by the last government, saying Labour had a “moral and ethical obligation” to protect the mental health of those seeking sanctuary in the UK.

BevSec

Eggplant, gosh you are on the attack! We all know about the suppression of women under a regime like the Taliban. We all know that this country is not like that yet and I have made it very clear in previous posts that I worry about what the future holds for my granddaughters. You, I know, do not share that concern, regardless of how much illegal immigration is happening. From what I have read the actual numbers are being kept from us and downplayed from what they actually are. Many people I have spoken to share my concerns.

BevSec I believe some people on here are still believing old statistics.

I believe there are people on here who don’t recognise when statistics are presented in a way that tells a story they want to believe, which is a different interpretation altogether.

Where is the evidence on this thread that "some people on here are still believing old statistics where are these facts about old statistics and them being inaccurate?

There are no comparative or indeed any figures given that I can find except Casdon suggestion on page 1 where she points out that you have to look at stats over a longer period than one day to get an overall picture.

petra

^there are 745,000 illegal migrants in the uk^ and counting.
People who manage sewage treatment plants dispute this figure.

What has sewage plants got to do with migrants?

Mt61, i too have read that sewage shows there are more illegal immigrants than official figures show, I think its the extra amount apparently.

Mt61

petra

there are 745,000 illegal migrants in the uk and counting.
People who manage sewage treatment plants dispute this figure.

What has sewage plants got to do with migrants?

More people more c---p. Sounds reasonable.

Italy now sending their illegals to Albania.

Mt61, i too have read that sewage shows there are more illegal immigrants than official figures show, I think its the extra amount apparently

BevSec how do they know that the ‘extra sewage’ comes from immigrants

Do you have a source for where you’ve read this, so I can read it myself.

Lizziedrip, it was probably either in the Daily Mail or maybe google feed. I will try to find it again.

Lizziedrip, I have found it. Richard Littlejohn wrote an article for the Daily Mail. I wish I could copy the link but to quote the relevant piece “ the judge said people without the proper papers can go below the radar for years. How do I know this? Partly because of the cases that cone before me, but also because of the evidence of the sewage industry - an excellent way of guaging how many people are really living in this country. The discrepancy between the official figures and what is actually going down the pipes shows there are more than a million more people in London than are legally registered, and another half a million or more outside the capital” the whole of the article is available to read just by googling illegal immigrants and sewage.

If I were a refugee, I sure would be pleased to enter a safe country without dying enroute. What does history tell us about population migration?

The sewage/immigrant rumour involving Richard Littlejohn, has a long history.

New News ?

No.

Littlejohn first claimed this in 2016 also in the Daily Mail, read for yourself:

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3753855/How-flush-illegal-immigrants-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-says-monitoring-sewage-homes-help-officers-target-raids.html

He quotes an unnamed judge as the source of the information, but in fact what the article does is not to give any statistics

but demands that Amber Rudd, the then Home Secretary, should investigate

“So what is new Home Secretary Amber Rudd waiting for? It’s time to put the sewage companies in the frontline.
If they tipped off border control when they suspected the outflow from No 43 far exceeded the norm for a property where only a family of four was registered, immigration officers could target their raids far more efficiently.”

There are no figures

Littlejohn, sparked by claims on X from Reform sources, is just repeating the 2016 article and speculation.

In short, a load of s***.

Wyllow3 I highly doubt he is making it up.

He was making it up in 2016 -read the 2016 article -

Nothing new has come out.

You quote him as saying "the evidence of the sewage industry" but to repeat, there are no statistics.

If there were, you can be sure he would have quoted them, and who the official source was.