Unstoppable migration?

[Osem]

And just to slow all things asylum down further:

The future of a key part of the government's system to remove failed asylum seekers is in doubt after the High Court ruled it was unlawful.

Mr Justice Nicol said the Home Office's system to "fast track" certain cases contained "structural unfairness".

The process accelerates legal hearings and appeals, while keeping the individual detained at all times.

The government said it was disappointed by the judgment and would be appealing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33113132

Balancing the need to deter false claims and remove those concerned with the desire to help the genuine is always going to be an issue but surely this is just going to give more time and freedom for those who've come here illegally and have no genuine claims to do what they can (e.g. having children) to ensure they'll never be removed.

[nomadking]

On deportation and extradition matters there is no right to a "fair hearing". The European Convention on Human Rights, itself stipulates that. There have even been specific rulings reinforcing that. There is no ECHR and therefore no HRA, requirement to give them any sort of hearing.

[Taf]

All an illegal immigrant has to do is claim asylum on the grounds of being homosexual or of another religion and therefore at risk of persecution. There is no test to determine if either of these claimed things are true, so they are are granted asylum.

[Osem]

As with age, if someone claims to be under 16 and it can't be shown that they're not, (difficult with no ID etc.) they're put into LA care (not detained) while enquiries are made (whatever they may be ) and tests arranged so they're free to abscond whenever they like. The system isn't worthy of the term, it's a complete joke so full of holes that it's a wonder we don't all fall out.

[Taf]

Obvious illegal entrants found by police are still routinely told to report to an immigration office, then released.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Taf

Obvious illegal entrants found by police are still routinely told to report to an immigration office, then released.

Yes. The 'enforcement' action taken often amounts to little more than a PR exercise. I guess they need to be seen to be doing something...

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Ah yes Somalia Gambia and Senegal the shining light of human rights

And don't tell me that no Libyans have tried to flee you're talking twaddle

Mate he's right, most Syrians that left went to camps in Turkey iirc. The sub Saharan Africans cross through libya because they have border controls or police to stop them. We're not responsible for Gambia, Senegal etc and look what happens when we try to make countries our responsibility. These migrants are economic mainly and even the Un says we have very different responsibilities towards them

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Mate he's right, most Syrians that left went to camps in Turkey iirc. The sub Saharan Africans cross through libya because they have border controls or police to stop them. We're not responsible for Gambia, Senegal etc and look what happens when we try to make countries our responsibility. These migrants are economic mainly and even the Un says we have very different responsibilities towards them

Most of the time matey we agree quite a lot. But I think we will have to agree to disagree on this part of the statement.

Its kind of leaning towards the below to me.

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me


And besides who would pick our lettuce ?

[Osem]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

And besides who would pick our lettuce ?

The same people who picked it before mass uncontrolled migration. Failing that maybe we could import more of it thereby providing more jobs in places crying out for them. Of course that'd quite possibly affect jiobs here so once again it boils down to striking a sensible and sustainable balance between trying to help poor countries whilst trying to look after our own people. What isn't sustainable economically or socially is allowing unlimited numbers of migrants to come here for a better life.

[Sirius]

They are now that desperate to get to the Free Bank UK they tried to storm the Channel tunnel last night

Channel Tunnel services have been disrupted after about 150 migrants tried to storm the Calais terminal.

Migrants entered restricted areas on the French side overnight, delaying and cancelling services, Eurotunnel said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-33393593

Traffic along the Channel Tunnel has been disrupted overnight after migrants tried to enter the terminal in Calais.

The problems started at around 10.30pm local time after 150 migrants attempted to enter a restricted area of the tunnel, according to a Calais official.

The interruption to traffic going through the tunnel caused long queues of lorries to form on the M20 in Kent.

A Eurotunnel spokesman said the incident had affected freight traffic only, with passenger services running to a full timetable.

http://news.sky.com/story/1513113/ca...channel-tunnel

[Osem]

It beggars belief that a rag tag group of migrants can be allowed to storm the Eurotunnel and nothing really be done. The presence of organised criminal gangs there should be ringing out loud alarm bells and is a clear demonstration that security at the port is totally ineffectual. It seems to me that these people and the associated gangs are breaking numerous laws and causing criminal damage yet getting away with it by being escorted away and simply allowed to try again as often as they want. Regardless of the reasons for leaving their homes, not a single migrant in Calais is fleeing death, persecution or anything else, they could and should have claimed asylum long before they ever got to N. France but have chosen not to do so and as such they are solely responsible for the situation they're in.

Perhaps you have see this before but I found it funny:

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

Of course, it has nothing to do with the channel tunnel people and/or asylum/benefit claimants.

[nomadking]

Actually the main point is they DO have the contacts. That is why they go to wherever they do. They don't turn up in their destination country and then say to themselves, "what now". There are many groups of their "own kind" already there.

Originally Posted by nomadking

Actually the main point is they DO have the contacts. That is why they go to wherever they do. They don't turn up in their destination country and then say to themselves, "what now". There are many groups of their "own kind" already there.

Indeed that's the case. We got a cleaner from imigri-land, one year later, the majority of our cleaners are from imigri-land.... a lot quit because the felt left out, they did not speak the lingo, imigri-land-ese

[Osem]

I often wonder whether the great and the good might have a slightly more jaundiced view if it was them who were losing their jobs, having their wages undercut, services reduced or being moved down the housing list as a result of uncontrolled migration.

It's so easy to preach about stuff like this when you're not directly affected or largely insulated from the worst effects.