Andy Burnham says wealthy areas must house more migrants after leafy village revolts over 1,250 asylum seekers

Aveline

Rights are not God given or immutable. We could relegislate to allow us more control of who enters the country.

It’s not our legislation to change.

It’s part of the Geneva Convention

AI

“International asylum law originated from ancient religious sanctuary traditions, evolving through 20th-century League of Nations agreements. The 1951 Refugee Convention (often called the Geneva Convention) served as its foundational modern cornerstone, legally defining refugees and establishing the vital duty of non-refoulement (not returning people to danger).“

So what is really important to remember is if a country decides to playing with laws of this nature, they risk other countries changing their own laws, laws which protect the many millions of British born people who’ve chosen to live or work in other countries rather than their birth countries.

Then there’s trade and NATO.

We’d not only be spending millions of ££££, and then more in time, we would risk relationships with all other countries who still abide by both International Asylum and Maritime Law.

Reform aside, I know of no political party who would ever wish to do this.
I recall Farage stating we’d have ££££££ more to spend on the NHS once we called out of the EU. We are still paying for this “divorce” and we lost so many benefits in both trade and grants and rights.

Remember the Dublin Agreement ?

Ideas and suggestions are all good, but some are non-starters for a myriad of different reasons.

I agree Cossy 18.31- France processes its own asylum seekers applications and has said clearly responded to Reform UK Operation Fortress proposal it will not accept UK asylum seeker applications that the UK does not want.

The Tories tried to introduce the Rwanda scheme. The UK agreed to pay the Rwanda government upfront costs of £370 million and a further £120 million once 300 people were relocated plus £20,000 for each person relocated as part of Economic Transformation and Integration fund. In addition the Uk had to pay up to £150,874 per person relocated to cover the costs of asylum processing and integration and an additional amount of £500 for healthcare and around £10,00 per person to facilitate their discharge.

Then there would be further operational fees, staffing costs, legal costs and escorting costs. So around £228,000 per asylum seeker, aside from up front costs. It was exceptionally poor value for money and faced legal changes that the government lost.

The costs were way higher than the cost of processing an asylum seeker in the UK in addition.

.

LemonJam

But why would France agree to accept asylum seekers the UK takes to France against the asylum seekers will? It is not legally obliged to do so. France has already responded to Reform UK Operation Fortress proposals with a firm no! The UK does not legislate on behalf of France and most would recognise the UK cannot tell France what to do.

So in what way would you relegislate as you suggest to be able to return boat people to France- what would this law say? What laws should the UK also decide not to comply with any more?

Which new laws could possibly allow the UK not needing adhere to existing maritime and international asylum seeker laws?

Also many AS have applied for asylum in France, as is their legal right.

Casdon

It’s extortionately expensive, legally a minefield, and very difficult to manage the logistics. The Tories have investigated it when they were in power, Ascension Island was the option. Also remember Diego Garcia and the huge issues that caused the government of the day.

Strewth Really ? I thought Rwanda was bonkers enough.

Yes it did read like that didn’t it? I get thoroughly brassed off when posters take seriously what some random foreign politician says with no real knowledge of whether what they’re positing has any value or sense at all.

It’s extortionately expensive, legally a minefield, and very difficult to manage the logistics. The Tories have investigated it when they were in power, Ascension Island was the option. Also remember Diego Garcia and the huge issues that caused the government of the day.

Tuliptree

Which islands are these I wonder? Another easy solution to a difficult problem that’s so easy no one in UK has ever thought about it

Who knows? 🤷‍♀️ I'm not aware that Australia has ever sent any illegal immigrants or asylum seekers to off shore islands owned by the UK...

I so agree with this comment Meandrogog:

"You will never be able to make convincing points to some posters on here no matter how true they are. Its better to just give up, otherwise it just leads to you feeling frustrated as your words are twisted".

Aveline

All you do is quote the status quo re laws. I'm trying to get over to you that changed times need changed management in whatever form it takes.
Obviously you're stuck in a groove but it's one that isn't inevitable.
We're never going to agree on this so no point in continuing. Pile on the insults at will if it helps you.

As you posted you wanted the UK government specifically to "relegislate" in order to "return asylum seekers to France" but have a problem when I`ask what UK domestic law changes you would like to see would look like in context of international laws you are in effect vetoing any such questions and accuse me of 'piling on the insults' as a result. Everyone can plainly see none of my posts contain an insult and neither have you referenced an insult.

So be it 😊

Which islands are these I wonder? Another easy solution to a difficult problem that’s so easy no one in UK has ever thought about it

Aveline

All you do is quote the status quo re laws. I'm trying to get over to you that changed times need changed management in whatever form it takes.
Obviously you're stuck in a groove but it's one that isn't inevitable.
We're never going to agree on this so no point in continuing. Pile on the insults at will if it helps you.

You will never be able to make convincing points to some posters on here no matter how true they are. Its better to just give up, otherwise it just leads to you feeling frustrated as your words are twisted.

The Australian politician responsible for stopping illegal immigration there wrote an excellent article recently.

He advocated the UK sending all illegal immigrants to an offshore island owned by the UK for processing, somewhere they will not want to be,

He said by Australia doing this it stopped illegal immigration completely.

Apparently the UK does own islands we could use. I do not understand why this is not done.

All you do is quote the status quo re laws. I'm trying to get over to you that changed times need changed management in whatever form it takes.
Obviously you're stuck in a groove but it's one that isn't inevitable.
We're never going to agree on this so no point in continuing. Pile on the insults at will if it helps you.

Absolutely not the case Aveline- no poster has stated "this is awful there's nothing we can do about it'. You are the poster that actually wrote "We don't have to just say, 'Oh this is awful there's nothing we can do' at 14.59.

There is plenty that the Government can do and is doing regarding this complex issue. To be clear I am not in the category of "this is awful there's nothing we can do about it' at all. I do not believe this Government simply "accepts the status quo" in your words and neither have I suggested "we must all accept the status quo".

There are laws in place as Im are you are aware- the UK can decide whther to comply with international laws or not. Where do you stand on that. The UK only has powers to make domestic laws not international laws.

You're the one that's saying that there is a solution to the 'status quo'. You're the poster that said UK "should 'relegislate' so that the UK can return asylum seekers to France" but you haven't explained how that can be done in the context that France has publicly stated it will not accept asylum seekers from the UK it does not want to process. So you're making a statement without taking into account the reality of France's position.

You haven't said what and how specifically the UK should or can 'relegislate' its domestic laws. You are aware of the 1951 Refugee Convention as you posted "Asylum laws can be redrafted by European heads of govt including us" but haven't a clue how that will come to pass in reality and in the context that the UK is a founding member and original signatory of the United Nations. The Untied Nations does not just comprise of EU countries. If you are proposing the UK leaves the United Nations and will no longer comply to United Nation international laws and conventions come out and be clear on your position.

Neither in fact have you explained how the UK change international maritime law unilaterally.

There literally is no point in telling me I have said something I have not actually said.

Lemonjam - that's exactly what you are all saying! You just quote a set of international laws drawn up 70 years ago as the reason we must all accept the current status quo.

Nobody and no government is saying 'this is awful there's nothing we can do'. Conservatives had their approach- the current government has their approach. Both parties processed applications and housed during that period in varying ways as legal obliged to do. Rwanda idea never got off the ground.

Well at least Aveline you appear to accept that the UK cannot in fact unilaterally change applicable refugeee/asylum seeker legislation.

You may describe yourself previously by the term a 'bleeding heart liberal' which is often sued as a criticism of others, but I will trust that you are not intentionally seeking to criticise other posters.

The United Nations treaty lead to the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Are you now saying that the UK government should seek out other countries in the world to overturn and get rid of the 1951 Refugee Convention via the United Nations ? Good luck with that! Not currently part of any party manifesto to put it to an electorate vote at a General Election.

Or are you suggesting the UK government should seek out other countries to try and lead a process whereby all the countries in the world signed up to the 1951 Refugee should seek to revise that law? If so and in what way could it be revised force France to process asylum seekers the UK does not want to process?

How to win friends, allies and influence/force France as a neighbouring country- not!

I used to be a bleeding heart liberal but I've had a good think.
As previously stated. The current situation is not as it was when asylum laws were drawn up. Asylum laws can be redrafted by European heads of govt including us. Other European countries are struggling with this problem too. Some are sending people home or closing borders.
We don't have to just say, 'Oh this is awful there's nothing we can do'.

Cossy does the truth hurt you ?

Forcing France ...

Tuliptree

Aveline

These boatloads come from France. Return them to France. If France don't want them then they can work out their own means of deterring this constant trail of young men.

OFGS I give up.

The asylum seeker has already left France territory en route with an intention to claim asylum in the UK.

Firstly what does return them to France actually involve- who is going to do this- why and by what method. How would this be done in compliance with international maritime laws and international laws relating to asylum seekers? This is just your first major legal hurdle.

Secondly, if that can be achieved legally, doubtful there is no legal agreement that France must take asylum seekers the UK does not want. So returning to my earlier question how can the UK magic up a law forcing to accept asylum seekers the UK does not want to process

Why do you expect France to work out a deterrent for people whose intention is to claim asylum in the UK? France has no legal obligation to do this on UK's behalf.

Similarly the UK has no legal obligation to work to a deterrent for asylum seekers with an intention to claim asylum in France or any other country.

Just Google or use AI

Somebody drew up the international asylum seeker laws that your refer to. They can be changed. They're not God given. They were not designed for the current situation. If European governments including us need to get their heads together then so be it.

Aveline

These boatloads come from France. Return them to France. If France don't want them then they can work out their own means of deterring this constant trail of young men.

OFGS I give up.

These boatloads come from France. Return them to France. If France don't want them then they can work out their own means of deterring this constant trail of young men.