Almost 1,000 migrants crossed the Channel yesterday.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 😂

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

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.

@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.

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.

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

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.

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.

(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........

Simple answer - we can't return people to France or indeed any other country without that countries permission.

Your idea of loading up planes and dumping people is not internationally viable. You are entering their sea or airspace. Practically, you cannot land a plane without permission.

These international rules have grown up because of war/invasion situations historically

but perhaps the simplest way of putting it is:

supposing another country just decided to load up boats or planes en masse and brought people to our country? Would you willingly let them land and offload people?

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?

sundowngirl

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Exactly why I keep a lower profile on these threads nowadays. Some posters are goady then trigger happy to report. Echo chambers are so soothing aren’t they?

👏👏👏👏👏

It’s difficult being a duck and paddling the opposite way 🦆🦆🦆🦆

I am going to use the ubiquitous some posters know the response/answer they are after, best ignored.

Sundowngirl, thank you for your post and your support.

Casdon
People not accepting the outcome is not a rationale not to do something though.
I agree, even though I voted remain.
I forget who posted about it being a generational thing, but certainly my DC and my DGC would be happy to have an ID card.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

Exactly why I keep a lower profile on these threads nowadays. Some posters are goady then trigger happy to report. Echo chambers are so soothing aren’t they?

👏👏👏👏👏

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.

I definitely share your concern for my granddaughters too

Mamie, I absolutely agree with you. It’s one of the reasons why I feel identity cards would be useful. Since everyone has them in France without a problem, I can’t see the problem here.
But as I said before, it’s not going to happen, certainly not anytime soon.

Shinamae

petra

Donald Tusk ( he of the EU commission) has stated that he will not accept any EU ruling on immigration when it threatens his country’s security. How times have changed.

www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/10/12/polish-pm-says-he-wont-respect-eu-right-to-asylum-if-it-threatens-his-countrys-security

Absolutely this
With the threat of Isis and Al Qaeda rearing their ugly heads again, we need to be much more careful who we let into this country but it looks like we don’t have that choice. They just come and come and come.
I feel many will be genuine refugees, but many will not and will be here to do this country harm..

Agreed. The Head of MI5 reported that the threat of terrorism in the UK is now 75% Islamist.

maddyfour

I actually would quite like a referendum on this issue, but as I stated before, we won’t be having one because it’s not the way things work in the UK. We have had referendums very rarely in this country, and as I said, the EU referendum has caused massive divisions in the country, sometimes even in families and still going on now. Very sad.
There won’t be a referendum any time soon. Although Blair was for identity cards, I’m not aware that our current government want them, nor did our last government, and so I expect it’s pointless discussing it, because it ain’t gonna happen!

Meanwhile people will continue to complain about migration to the UK, whilst presumably being aware that one of the reasons migrants chose to go there is that it is possible to live under the radar....