IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Our border in France., What's wrong with having it in UK?
On the edge
post Mar 3 2016, 01:26 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Lots of debate recently about our border. It seems we have an agreement with the French a Government that our border control can actually be in their Country. A bit odd that, to say the least, why shouldn't these controls be in the UK? As things exist, we are expecting the French to do the real job for us. Why should they?

Particularly with a no vote, surely we want the border in our own jurisdiction. Then any passenger coming through the gate without the necessary paperwork is simply turned back. That's how it works in many other Countries, why not here?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Mar 3 2016, 03:27 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (On the edge @ Mar 3 2016, 01:26 PM) *
Lots of debate recently about our border. It seems we have an agreement with the French a Government that our border control can actually be in their Country. A bit odd that, to say the least, why shouldn't these controls be in the UK? As things exist, we are expecting the French to do the real job for us. Why should they?

Particularly with a no vote, surely we want the border in our own jurisdiction. Then any passenger coming through the gate without the necessary paperwork is simply turned back. That's how it works in many other Countries, why not here?

I guess that is because eviction is a lot more problematic for us being an island; once someone is here, getting rid of them could be a challenge.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Mar 3 2016, 05:11 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Mar 3 2016, 03:27 PM) *
I guess that is because eviction is a lot more problematic for us being an island; once someone is here, getting rid of them could be a challenge.


Agreed. Nonetheless Australia, a very big island, seems to manage.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
spartacus
post Mar 3 2016, 06:09 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,840
Joined: 24-July 09
Member No.: 221



Australia doesn't have the same ratio of Guardian readers and do-gooders or lawyers taking on Legal Aid cases as this island.... Hence once they get through the tunnel getting rid of them will take years and cost us a fortune....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Mar 3 2016, 06:23 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (spartacus @ Mar 3 2016, 06:09 PM) *
Australia doesn't have the same ratio of Guardian readers and do-gooders or lawyers taking on Legal Aid cases as this island.... Hence once they get through the tunnel getting rid of them will take years and cost us a fortune....


Quite right, but by common consent the segment of our population you mention are a small minority now. Surely a swift bit of primary legislation would put things to rights? A far better response for the no camp instead of just insisting the French do it for us. Who will complain; what are our politicians made of?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gel
post Mar 5 2016, 02:41 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 948
Joined: 11-September 09
From: Thames Valley
Member No.: 337



And Oz of course has lots of remote uninhabited islands in vicinity, which are a bit in short supply here!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Mar 5 2016, 06:33 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (spartacus @ Mar 3 2016, 06:09 PM) *
Australia doesn't have the same ratio of Guardian readers and do-gooders or lawyers taking on Legal Aid cases as this island.... Hence once they get through the tunnel getting rid of them will take years and cost us a fortune....

I don't actually read the Grauniad but I guess you'd include me in that: Personally I think the injustice is the very thing you complain about - the time. It is monstrously unjust to keep someone hanging around for so long dithering about whether they can stay or not. The Home Office is quite hopeless in this area, and has been for years - it shouldn't take more than a couple of days to decide whether someone can be granted asylum, and if they're not then ship them off straight away. Obviously the process has to be fair an compassionate, and it is in the nature of people fleeing tyranny that they're not necessarily going to have all of their papers in order, but locking them up in a detention centre for six months is not going to help out find out what you can't easily find out in a couple of days, so the answer has to be to presume good faith and grant asylum to anyone fleeing terror.

Obviously, it would also help if the UK could work with the rest of Europe to bring peace, stability, and economic prosperity to the places of the world where terror reigns, because our lust for regional influence over the last 500 years has created so much of the suffering and instability that is driving people from their homes in the first place.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Mar 5 2016, 10:44 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Mar 5 2016, 06:33 PM) *
I don't actually read the Grauniad but I guess you'd include me in that: Personally I think the injustice is the very thing you complain about - the time. It is monstrously unjust to keep someone hanging around for so long dithering about whether they can stay or not. The Home Office is quite hopeless in this area, and has been for years - it shouldn't take more than a couple of days to decide whether someone can be granted asylum, and if they're not then ship them off straight away. Obviously the process has to be fair an compassionate, and it is in the nature of people fleeing tyranny that they're not necessarily going to have all of their papers in order, but locking them up in a detention centre for six months is not going to help out find out what you can't easily find out in a couple of days, so the answer has to be to presume good faith and grant asylum to anyone fleeing terror.

The issue with a great many illegal immigrants is that they have no papers - nothing to prove where they are from. Which makes it impossible to determine whether they risk persecution if they are sent home - because it is not possible to say where their home is.

For this reason many illegal immigrants destroy their papers making deportation almost impossible.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Mar 6 2016, 11:25 AM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (blackdog @ Mar 5 2016, 10:44 PM) *
The issue with a great many illegal immigrants is that they have no papers - nothing to prove where they are from. Which makes it impossible to determine whether they risk persecution if they are sent home - because it is not possible to say where their home is.

For this reason many illegal immigrants destroy their papers making deportation almost impossible.

Yes, sure, it's inevitable that if you're fleeing tyranny that you won't necessarily have your papers, and nor is it practical to ask the country you're fleeing to vouch for who you are, so the only civilised answer is to grant them asylum - it's really not that complicated.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Mar 6 2016, 12:19 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Mar 6 2016, 11:25 AM) *
Yes, sure, it's inevitable that if you're fleeing tyranny that you won't necessarily have your papers, and nor is it practical to ask the country you're fleeing to vouch for who you are, so the only civilised answer is to grant them asylum - it's really not that complicated.

To me, and I'm not alone in this, the view that we should let em all in is as dangerous as it is financially suicidal. Most of these people are coming from Syria, a very great many of them are young Muslim men coming from a country ravaged by Isis. Its not just me who suspects that the easiest way to get fanatical Jihadist killers comfortably ensconced into the heart of the hated Western society is to simply mix them into the genuine asylum seekers. Now that's not complicated either! Of course we need to know who we are extending our hands to, before we get them bitten off.

Oh and if your prepared enough to bring iPhones and iPods with you (as evidenced by scenes on the telly!) I'm sure that the genuine ones will find time to pick up their papers, c'nest pas?


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Mar 6 2016, 01:44 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Mar 6 2016, 12:19 PM) *
To me, and I'm not alone in this, the view that we should let em all in is as dangerous as it is financially suicidal. Most of these people are coming from Syria, a very great many of them are young Muslim men coming from a country ravaged by Isis. Its not just me who suspects that the easiest way to get fanatical Jihadist killers comfortably ensconced into the heart of the hated Western society is to simply mix them into the genuine asylum seekers. Now that's not complicated either! Of course we need to know who we are extending our hands to, before we get them bitten off.

Oh and if your prepared enough to bring iPhones and iPods with you (as evidenced by scenes on the telly!) I'm sure that the genuine ones will find time to pick up their papers, c'nest pas?


Fair enough. So, given that the French might not want and we should not expect them to be our 'wall' - what is your solution?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Mar 6 2016, 04:06 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Mar 6 2016, 12:19 PM) *
To me, and I'm not alone in this, the view that we should let em all in is as dangerous as it is financially suicidal. Most of these people are coming from Syria, a very great many of them are young Muslim men coming from a country ravaged by Isis. Its not just me who suspects that the easiest way to get fanatical Jihadist killers comfortably ensconced into the heart of the hated Western society is to simply mix them into the genuine asylum seekers. Now that's not complicated either! Of course we need to know who we are extending our hands to, before we get them bitten off.

Oh and if your prepared enough to bring iPhones and iPods with you (as evidenced by scenes on the telly!) I'm sure that the genuine ones will find time to pick up their papers, c'nest pas?

You position is essentially that Blighty should not give asylum to anyone, and I can't agree that that's a humane or civilised approach, or even that it's reasonable or proportionate. Only granting sanctuary to people with bona fide travel documents originating from war-torn terror states would keep out economic migrants from other countries, but it would turn away people fleeing without papers, and that doesn't seem right.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Turin Machine
post Mar 6 2016, 04:55 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,682
Joined: 23-September 10
From: In the lower 40
Member No.: 1,104



You make it sound like they a running at a moment's notice, not true. They find time to pack and in most cases arrange for travel. So how come they can't pick up their ID documents at the same time? Answer is of course the people smugglers tell them not to precisely so they can't be identified. Those who are legit will have their papers. Now that's not complicated!


--------------------
Gammon. And proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Mar 6 2016, 05:13 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Mar 6 2016, 04:55 PM) *
You make it sound like they a running at a moment's notice, not true. They find time to pack and in most cases arrange for travel. So how come they can't pick up their ID documents at the same time? Answer is of course the people smugglers tell them not to precisely so they can't be identified. Those who are legit will have their papers. Now that's not complicated!


So exactly what are you proposing?

It sounds like you are saying that:
A) we need to substantially increase the number of Customs and Court Officers at all ports of entry
2) everyone entering the UK will have their documentation checked
C) anyone found with documentation out of order will be stopped from entry. (That is, they will be left in the hands of their transporter to do what they will)
D) anyone claiming asylum will immediately have their claim tested and if rejected as in C, barred from entry. Appeals could be dealt with having magistrates on hand.
Presumably, the transporters, railways, coaches, lorries will need some sort of secure seating installed so that the outward journey can be made.

Yes, it would work of course. We'd necessarily need a squad to watch remote airfields and beaches as well. I suspect the transport industry particularly Lorry drivers (who moan about everything anyway) might raise the odd objection or two.

It's also going to ****** up all those foreign holiday makers, business travellers etc. because whilst it's getting set up, the queues are going to be pretty horrendous. Still, might encourage more to take UK holidays. Then there is the cost, all those extra civil servants, needed 24/7.

Still worth it eh?


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Mar 6 2016, 05:51 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Turin Machine @ Mar 6 2016, 04:55 PM) *
You make it sound like they a running at a moment's notice, not true. They find time to pack and in most cases arrange for travel. So how come they can't pick up their ID documents at the same time? Answer is of course the people smugglers tell them not to precisely so they can't be identified. Those who are legit will have their papers. Now that's not complicated!

Deciding if they are legit is not the problem - the problem is complying with international convention (law?) in returning them to their home country. If you can't identify the home country you can't deport them - precisely why they destroy their IDs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
je suis Charlie
post Mar 6 2016, 07:53 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,597
Joined: 10-January 15
Member No.: 10,530



QUOTE (On the edge @ Mar 6 2016, 05:13 PM) *
So exactly what are you proposing?

It sounds like you are saying that:
A) we need to substantially increase the number of Customs and Court Officers at all ports of entry
2) everyone entering the UK will have their documentation checked
C) anyone found with documentation out of order will be stopped from entry. (That is, they will be left in the hands of their transporter to do what they will)
D) anyone claiming asylum will immediately have their claim tested and if rejected as in C, barred from entry. Appeals could be dealt with having magistrates on hand.
Presumably, the transporters, railways, coaches, lorries will need some sort of secure seating installed so that the outward journey can be made.

Yes, it would work of course. We'd necessarily need a squad to watch remote airfields and beaches as well. I suspect the transport industry particularly Lorry drivers (who moan about everything anyway) might raise the odd objection or two.

It's also going to ****** up all those foreign holiday makers, business travellers etc. because whilst it's getting set up, the queues are going to be pretty horrendous. Still, might encourage more to take UK holidays. Then there is the cost, all those extra civil servants, needed 24/7.

Still worth it eh?

Yup!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Hatter
post Mar 6 2016, 07:53 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 287
Joined: 11-September 13
Member No.: 10,046



They already check passports and tickets on Eurostar and Planes so for those who travel the normal ways would have had to have shown where they come from.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Mar 6 2016, 08:53 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,025
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (On the edge @ Mar 3 2016, 01:26 PM) *
Lots of debate recently about our border. It seems we have an agreement with the French a Government that our border control can actually be in their Country. A bit odd that, to say the least, why shouldn't these controls be in the UK? As things exist, we are expecting the French to do the real job for us. Why should they?

Particularly with a no vote, surely we want the border in our own jurisdiction. Then any passenger coming through the gate without the necessary paperwork is simply turned back. That's how it works in many other Countries, why not here?
Yes, and should the UK vote no in the EU referendum we'd see "the Jungle" in Calais move from Calais to Dover.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Mar 6 2016, 09:12 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (user23 @ Mar 6 2016, 08:53 PM) *
Yes, and should the UK vote no in the EU referendum we'd see "the Jungle" in Calais move from Calais to Dover.

Not necessarily. The last time the Europeans left England was at the start of the Dark Ages, and I don't suppose our island economy will do much better this time round, so I can imagine quite a queue of Brits in Calais trying to leave before the lights go out.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
je suis Charlie
post Mar 6 2016, 11:40 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,597
Joined: 10-January 15
Member No.: 10,530



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Mar 6 2016, 09:12 PM) *
Not necessarily. The last time the Europeans left England was at the start of the Dark Ages, and I don't suppose our island economy will do much better this time round, so I can imagine quite a queue of Brits in Calais trying to leave before the lights go out.

Except the Europeans arrived back in force in 1066! And never left.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

6 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th March 2024 - 10:46 AM